Gladstones LBC

plenclaim

Something like the below? Again, i appreciate your assistance with this greatly.

Hello,

This email is in regards to the 'Letter before claim' letter i have received through my door on 21/11/2018.

I have sent a SAR to your client 'Gemini Parking Solutions' on 22/11/2018 and in doing so require a restriction of data processing along with my case(s) in question to be put on hold.

See below my address for service along with your reference number:

[name + address]

Reference: 1*****.***0

If the case is not put on hold for a short duration to allow sufficient time to read the data and documents received from the SAR and re-start the PAP 30 day period, then your client along with yourselves will be reported to the Information Commissioner's Office.

As time is not an essence with this case, if you proceed with the claim despite allowing sufficient time following a responce to the SAR then this will breach the PAP along with the GDPR/DPA.



Yours faithfully

[name]

Coupon-mad

Hello,

Not ''hello'' in a formal email to a solicitor! You need to use your letter writing skills taught at school:

Always

''Dear Sirs''

and

responce

should be

response

plenclaim

I've had a response back from Gladstones Solicitors stating that they cannot process my request to put the claim on hold due to "compelling legitimate grounds for processing my data", although they have extended my deadline by another 30 days to respond or pay the outstanding amount(just under two months now).

I haven't received a response from Gemini Parking Solutions yet, would you recommend i await their response first before replying to Gladstones?


Thanks

nosferatu1001

No, state that there is no urgency to the claim as their client has a furthe r(6 yeasr minus the date of parking event) to pursue the claim.
Filing a claim subject to queries over data accuracy would be premature, and undue pressure on the resulting defendant out of proportion to the urgency of it.

Coupon-mad

What did you find when you searched the forum for compelling as your keyword? Saves us repeating ourselves!

plenclaim

Thanks for the responses,


I'm looking at filing a complaint with ICO in regards to their recent response

Unfortunately we cannot process your request because we can demonstrate compelling legitimate grounds for the processing of your data which override the interests, rights and freedoms of you as an individual. That legitimate interest being that we are acting on behalf of our client for the recovery of monies relating to unpaid Parking Charge Notices. To process your data is necessary and lawful, as it is required in furtherance of our client’s instructions, and we act for them on their rights and obligations for the recovery of such monie

ICO's website is currently timing out whenever i try to browse it to make a complaint section so i will keep checking it throughout the day.


The structure of my complaint was going to be based around the following to points in the PAP for debt claims:

4.2
If the debtor indicates that they are seeking debt advice, the creditor must allow the debtor a reasonable period for the advice to be obtained. In any event, the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing any document requested by the debtor, whichever is the later.

5.2
If the debtor requests a document or information, the creditor must –


(a) provide the document or information;
or
(b) explain why the document or information is unavailable, within 30 days of receipt of the request.

Would the above points also take into account my outstanding SAR with Gemini Parking Solutions? Gladstones have provided me another 30 days ontop of my original 30, although they still refused to put the claim itself on hold.

Coupon-mad

You can only complain about one company per complaint. So you would have to do two ICO complaints if you feel both Gladstones and Gemini have breached the GDPR rules about a SAR.

plenclaim

Thanks for the reply,


I have received a response back from Gemini requesting further personal identification before proceeding with my SAR (Password / Driving license etc).

This feels over the top seeing as i already provided them with my full name and address which is the exact same information they recieved when making a request via DVLA based on my number plate.

Would you recommend filing a complaint to ICO against Gemini based on this? If so would i need to reply back to Gemini refusing their request for further data and just wait for a response from ICO?

My previous reply in this thread was about filing a complaint to ICO about Gladstones Solicitors, although this reply is specifically Gemini ( Which would be two separate ICO complaints as you pointed out)


Thanks in advance

plenclaim

Very busy week for me i've only managed to get back to this recently.

I have emailed Gemini in response to their unnecessary additional personal data request and currently awaitng a response in regards to my SAR.

I'm now able to pull down the ICO complaint form, would you recommend i draft up a complain about Gladstones refusing to put the case on hold and only providing an extra 30 days? It is quite posisble this might be enough time, although i'm not sure if the goal here is to apply pressure where possible(looking around this looks to be their generic response).

Or should i hold off replying to Gladstones until i have received my SAR and proceed from there depending on the data i am provided?

plenclaim

Any ideas how to proceed with this in regards whether or not i file the ICO complaint against galdstones at this point, or should i be waiting for a further response to my SAR before contacting Gladstones further?



Thanks in advance